Do Atheists hate and encourage violence against Christians?

[atheistgirl]

It’s a shame that many of our Moslem and/or atheist brethren have to hate us so much. I think we ought to pray for them first, and then those we love second. The Patriarch has many prayers already, but those tempted by Satan have few prayers in the world. Love them, despite their lack of love. They are our dear fellow creatures!

I dont think the article suggested atheists were behind the assassination attempt. What evidence do you have that atheists ‘‘hate’’ people of faith to the point of doing violence. I know some very high profile people - atheists - speak out against religion, but Ive never heard them advocate violence. In fact, they seem to hold the position that viloence is almost entirely the preserve of faith, based on history, and current events. The normal atheists I know, and live and work with, and socialize with, and do business with, never actually think about peoples faith at all, and just deal with people as they find them. I personally abhor all finds of violence, against all people and animals, of all kinds, for any reason what so ever.

 

[crazzeto]

I dont think the article suggested atheists were behind the assassination attempt. What evidence do you have that atheists ‘‘hate’’ people of faith to the point of doing violence. I know some very high profile people - atheists - speak out against religion, but Ive never heard them advocate violence. In fact, they seem to hold the position that viloence is almost entirely the preserve of faith, based on history, and current events. The normal atheists I know, and live and work with, and socialize with, and do business with, never actually think about peoples faith at all, and just deal with people as they find them. I personally abhor all finds of violence, against all people and animals, of all kinds, for any reason what so ever.

I’d say trying to convince England to unjustly arrest Pope Benedict XVI on basless charges of “Crimes against Humanity” would count as “violence”.

Edit
Prayers for the Eccumenical Patriarch.

 

[Loml]

In fact, they seem to hold the position that viloence is almost entirely the preserve of faith, based on history, and current events.

That’s because they ignore the 20th century and deny that unborn children are human beings…

 

[crazzeto]

Oh yeah, I would also consider the unjust attempt to villify Mother Teresa as violence as well, this too comes from the leaders of many schools of “Athiesm”. I really can’t believe that anyone truely believes that athiests are truely non-violents. History has shown athiests to be among the most violent leaders in history.

 

[vsedriver]

In fact, they seem to hold the position that viloence is almost entirely the preserve of faith, based on history, and current events.

That’s an odd thing to say when you consider that between Stalin, Lenin, Po Pot and other atheistic leaders of the 20th century killed more people than all the religions put together.

 

[Catherine_Grant]

**Moderator Note: **

This discussion on atheism’s relations with Christianity was sufficiently off-topic to create a new thread from it. Please see here for the original discussion on a prevented assassination attempt on Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I.

May God Bless You Abundantly,
Catherine Grant
Eastern Catholicism Moderator

 

[seeker57]

That’s an odd thing to say when you consider that between Stalin, Lenin, Po Pot and other atheistic leaders of the 20th century killed more people than all the religions put together.

I think you would be hard pressed to prove that statement.

Someone may call themselves an athiest, a Catholic, etc., but that really doesn’t necessarily mean they are defined by that term.

Remember, Hitler was a Catholic, or at least he was raised Catholic, yet he killed many Catholic priests, nuns, and other religious.

Does that mean that all Catholics are fascist killers? No, of course not.

Likewise, defining all atheists as evil or violent is also inappropriate.

I also think some of you have a bizarre definition of violence.

Accusing the pope of crimes against humanity, while admittedly far-fetched, would not constitute violence against him nor against Catholics in general.

Violence is defined in the Merriam Webster dictionary as:

a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare effecting illegal entry into a house)
b : an instance of violent treatment or procedure.

The OP refers to a story about an assassination attempt against the patriarch of Constatinople, That would be a violent act or a violent undertaking.

Seeker

 

[GloriousOrder]

To be fair, the original quote was “hate us so much”, not “try to kill us so much”. I lumped in ‘atheists’ with the radical Moslems out of a sort of habitual reflex to include things which I disagree with into the same category, even if they are not terribly related. That sort of unthinking flinch merits an apology on my part. Clarity is better than victory…

Now, to the new topic itself: atheists do not generally seem to encourage violence against Christians at the moment. Dawkins, Hitchens, Bennett, Harris, and the like seem to be quite docile. I believe Hitchens himself is against abortion because he is against murder. Atheists tend to be sensible people, despite their illogical ideas about the universe.

Seeker57, there is no reason to assume Adolf Hitler retained his native Catholicism. We are talking about real beliefs here, not cultural associations. Hitler was most definitely not a Catholic in any sense, just as murderous bishops and bribe-accepting cardinals are not Catholic. What comes from the heart defiles the man, as our Lord said.

 

[Sufjon]

I dont think the article suggested atheists were behind the assassination attempt. What evidence do you have that atheists ‘‘hate’’ people of faith to the point of doing violence. I know some very high profile people - atheists - speak out against religion, but Ive never heard them advocate violence. In fact, they seem to hold the position that viloence is almost entirely the preserve of faith, based on history, and current events. The normal atheists I know, and live and work with, and socialize with, and do business with, never actually think about peoples faith at all, and just deal with people as they find them. I personally abhor all finds of violence, against all people and animals, of all kinds, for any reason what so ever.

Hello Atheist Girl:

-The initial post that stated that Muslims and atheists hate Christians and commit violence against them was centered around an article about Islamic extremists. The poster bundled atheists into the statement about violence against Christians. In my thinking it was rather out of context, or at least out of step to do that.

-I sea lot of hostility or frustration between religious people and atheists in general . I run into this a lot on the Huffington Post for instance (yes, I am a flaming liberal). That said, I have never heard Atheists promote violence against Christians or vice verse.

-Most atheists that I know or converse with regularly do not use non-belief in God as license to do whatever they like. The ones I know are well educated, responsible, and are good simply because it makes sense to be so.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[Sufjon]

**Moderator Note: **

This discussion on atheism’s relations with Christianity was sufficiently off-topic to create a new thread from it. Please see here for the original discussion on a prevented assassination attempt on Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I.

May God Bless You Abundantly,
Catherine Grant
Eastern Catholicism Moderator

Thanks Catherine! That helped.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[Publisher]

The athiests that I know really are not nearly concerned about “Christians” as much as “Christians” are about atheists.

 

[CrazyRachel]

I’d say trying to convince England to unjustly arrest Pope Benedict XVI on basless charges of “Crimes against Humanity” would count as “violence”.

Edit
Prayers for the Eccumenical Patriarch.

Richard Dawkins was pretty much the main advocate for the Pope’s arrest but many people were behind him, and when I heard about that I’ve honestly never felt so ashamed to be English in all my life. I admit I didnt want the Pope to come here because I was scared he’d get hurt, which is terrible of me. I didnt want my Pope to visit my country because I was scared of what my so called fellow countrymen would do to him. Thankfully I was so wrong and the visit was a huge success

As for athiests hating and encouraging violence against Christians generally, all I can say is that you get both good and bad people in all walks of life. I’ve known many atheists who are hateful of Christians, moreso than members of other religions probably for the sake of political correctness, and do encourage hostility and indeed physical violence against them. But then again I’ve known atheists who are easy going and non judgemental people who simply wish to get on with their lives without causing any trouble. The difference between these two types of athiests is that the first group are “fashionable” and are too scared to walk against the crowd and the latter group are simply everyday people who are good and sweet and many of them have told me they wish they shared my faith but simply could not and I can only admire those who told me this because it must have took alot of courage for them to say it. They’re still God’s children… whether they believe it or not lol.

Now, to the new topic itself: atheists do not generally seem to encourage violence against Christians at the moment. Dawkins, Hitchens, Bennett, Harris, and the like seem to be quite docile. I believe Hitchens himself is against abortion because he is against murder. Atheists tend to be sensible people, despite their illogical ideas about the universe.

I do see what you’re saying but as for Hitchens, just because he is not physically agressive, I cannot describe his language as docile. The way he speaks about Mother Teresa is vicious and poisonous and it incites hatred.

 

[crazzeto]

Richard Dawkins was pretty much the main advocate for the Pope’s arrest but many people were behind him, and when I heard about that I’ve honestly never felt so ashamed to be English in all my life. I admit I didnt want the Pope to come here because I was scared he’d get hurt, which is terrible of me. I didnt want my Pope to visit my country because I was scared of what my so called fellow countrymen would do to him. Thankfully I was so wrong and the visit was a huge success

As for athiests hating and encouraging violence against Christians generally, all I can say is that you get both good and bad people in all walks of life. I’ve known many atheists who are hateful of Christians, moreso than members of other religions probably for the sake of political correctness, and do encourage hostility and indeed physical violence against them. But then again I’ve known atheists who are easy going and non judgemental people who simply wish to get on with their lives without causing any trouble. The difference between these two types of athiests is that the first group are “fashionable” and are too scared to walk against the crowd and the latter group are simply everyday people who are good and sweet and many of them have told me they wish they shared my faith but simply could not and I can only admire those who told me this because it must have took alot of courage for them to say it. They’re still God’s children… whether they believe it or not lol.

I do see what you’re saying but as for Hitchens, just because he is not physically agressive, I cannot describe his language as docile. The way he speaks about Mother Teresa is vicious and poisonous and it incites hatred.

I’ve underlined the most important part, there’s more to violence than physical violence. This is why legally we register psychological and verbal abuse every bit as badly as we register physical. More over, the beginings of physical violence are verbal and psychological. More than just Dawkings was behind wanting the Pope arrested, the supposedly docial Hitchens was right there with him. I think Hitchens even attempted to make the case before the world court, he was serious, deadly serious.

Do we really think this is not violence? Oh yes, this is a very bad violence.

 

[kesa82]

I’d say trying to convince England to unjustly arrest Pope Benedict XVI on basless charges of “Crimes against Humanity” would count as “violence”.

Edit
Prayers for the Eccumenical Patriarch.

Frankly, I don’t care whether the charges are baseless or no.
Atheism is a faith-based religion . Certainly not based on science, that would require an encyclopedic knowledge of science, including that science as yet unknown !
So, faith-based.
Or the person is just making the wildly improbable claim that they see no evidence of a creator.
Anyway, Atheism, and its secular manifestations, are just another religion.

As to the purely secular and temporal aspects :

I recognize the Catholic Church as my government. The Pope is that governments head of state, his Bishops are officers of that state.

"Arrest " is a quaint legalism. It looks like an act of war to me. The polite debate ends there.

 

[AntiTheist]

Atheism is a faith-based religion.

No. Atheism is the lack of belief in gods, and like all the other beliefs I lack, I lack belief in gods because I don’t see sufficient evidence to accept the claim.

When you are presented with a claim, you must decide whether you are going to accept it or not. The default position is not to accept it until you think that there is good reason and evidence to accept it.

In the exact same way that I don’t need “an encyclopedic knowledge of science” to say that I don’t believe in leprechauns, I don’t need an encyclopedic knowledge of science to say that I don’t believe in gods. I’m simply not convinced by either claim, so I retain my initial, default state of non-belief in regards to those claims until there comes a time when there is evidence to convince me. [And, obviously, I assume that everyone here is bright enough to understand that I’m not comparing your god to a leprechaun…I’m aware that the claims are different…I’m comparing the standards of evidence in each case]

There is, quite simply, no faith required.